Appellant loses in Ex parte Nicol
Ex parte Nicol
The Examiner looks to a reference for all that it teaches and does not limit a reference to its preferred embodiments. Beckman Instruments, Inc. v. LKB Produkter AB, 892 F.2d 1547, 1551 (Fed. Cir. 1989). Thus, we are persuaded that, as found by the Examiner, Goldberg teaches or suggests a receive only mode in which the receiver and signal processing circuits are powered on, as well as a transmit only mode in which the receiver is powered off, but the signal processing circuits may remain powered, as recited in claim 1.
As to obviousness
Although Goldberg does not mention that components of the communications circuit are powered or are not powered independently of the receiver, Willey teaches that a mobile station “can take many steps to conserve power, including, but not limited to one or more of” turning off/removing power from a radio receiver or turning off/removing power from associated hardware. Ans. 7-12; see Willey, col. 4, l. 45-col. 5, l. 4. As the U.S. Supreme Court has explained, “[w]hen there is a design need . . . to solve a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp.” KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 421 (2007) (emphasis added).